Mr. Speaker, while the member opposite is entitled to make whatever criticisms he chooses, he is not entitled to invent his own facts. On that issue, once again he is wrong.

We remain committed to the joint strike fighter program. A budget has been allocated; a contract has not been signed. When all is done, we will ensure that the air force and Canadians receive the best quality for their money.

Talking about messing it up badly, Mr. Speaker, you should see their record on the environment, and it just gets worse.

The Conservatives want to use this budget to help their oil industry friends by gutting environmental protections, such as by clawing back first nations consultations, shutting Canadians out of environmental reviews and rubber stamping major projects without any consideration of the impacts.

The Conservatives are trying to bury their anti-environmental agenda deep in the budget where no one will see it.

Canadians want accountability and they want debate. Will the minister agree to propose these changes in a stand-alone bill?

Mr. Speaker, our government makes no apologies for finding more cost-effective ways of protecting both the environment and jobs and the Canadian economy, but I did find a very interesting quote the other day. It says:

People in politics tend to see successes in terms of increasing the budget, but when I was minister of the environment, I reduced by 15 per cent the budget....

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Natural Resources has repeatedly and brazenly undermined the process reviewing the northern gateway pipeline project, actually attacking Canadians who had the audacity to stand up for our homes and our land, calling them radicals.

Now he is proposing a Republican-style rider in the budget that would further undermine the few environmental protections that Canadians have.

Is he planning to further undermine this process by changing the rules mid-stream, or will he finally respect the fact that when Canadians raise their voices in defence of their homes and their land, it does not make them radicals; it makes them Canadians.

Mr. Speaker, resource development can be advanced while protecting the environment. We can generate hundreds of thousands of jobs, trillions of dollars in economic development, billions of dollars for governments to support social programs and, at the same time, make sure that every project is safe for Canadians and safe for the environment.

We can and we will. Why will the NDP not join us in this nation-making effort?

I am still trying to sort out the contradictions here. The Prime Minister said there is a $9 billion limit on the budget. That is the budget. We do not know what the price per plane is for the F-35s. It will certainly be more than the much vaunted number of $75 million. We will not have 65 planes.

Therefore, my question for the Associate Minister of National Defence is, how will you square this circle? How can you help us clear up this situation? What planes will we get, at what cost and when will they be delivered?

Mr. Speaker, as indicated, Canada is a partner in a joint strike fighter program developing an aircraft.

We will continue to be committed to that program and when things are settled and according to the kinds of standards and expectations we have here in this country, a decision will be made as to what we will do next.

Mr. Speaker, for the first time in seven years, the government will talk about young people in its budget. Unfortunately, that is because it is shutting down Katimavik, our biggest youth service program.

We know that the Conservative government does not care about empowering or investing in our youth, but does the minister realize that by cutting Katimavik he is also hurting thousands of community organizations in hundreds of towns across the country?

Every year because of Katimavik thousands of young Canadians get to serve their country, get to learn how to build a better Canada one community at a time. Apparently, that does not matter.

Will the minister be honest enough to admit that the government does not care about young people?

James MooreConservativeMinister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages

Mr. Speaker, we have a strong record in supporting kids and that will continue.

My colleague will have to wait for the budget tomorrow, but I know that he is very anxious to please Canadians. I think the best way for him to please Canadians would be on Saturday night when he gets into the ring, if he keeps his hands nice and low and keeps his chin nice and high, he will be giving Canadians the greatest show we have been waiting for.

Mr. Speaker, earlier this week, there was one. Now there are two: two unilingual anglophone immigration board members in Montreal. Do I have to point out that Montreal is in Quebec, and that the Quebec nation is francophone? This situation is unacceptable not only on the surface, but at the core, because it makes the board members' work inefficient, questionable and perilous.

When will the government fix the problem and show this country's francophones the respect they deserve?

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for his question. The Immigration and Refugee Board complies with the Official Languages Act. It holds hearings in the applicants' chosen official language before a board member who speaks that language.

In Montreal, 21 board members are bilingual, nine are unilingual francophones and two are unilingual anglophones. Thirty percent of applications are submitted in English, and those hearings are held in English. There is no problem in Montreal. The board provides services in the applicants' chosen language.

Mr. Speaker, the member says there is no problem in Montreal. So why did the Supreme Court quash one decision?

Bilingualism is considered merely an asset when people are applying for the job. It should be an essential requirement for the Montreal office. In this kind of environment, language skills are extremely important. One cannot understand a case if one cannot read the file. That seems pretty straightforward to me.

When will the Conservatives respect both the letter and the spirit of the Official Languages Act?

Mr. Speaker, the spirit and letter of the Official Languages Act require us to provide services in the official language of choice of Canadians, or refugee claimants in this case. There are nine unilingual francophones in the Montreal office.

Is he suggesting that we should dismiss the nine unilingual francophones? No, because Canada is a bilingual country. We respect the rights of francophones and anglophones, both the 30% of claimants in Montreal who file their claims in English, and the nine decision makers who are unilingual francophones.

Mr. Speaker, Canadians across the country are concerned about drug shortages. These have been caused in large part by sole-source supply agreements entered into by provincial and territorial governments and their drug purchasers.

Could the Minister of Health please give the House an update on what she has been doing to deal with this very important issue?

Leona AglukkaqConservativeMinister of Health and Minister of the Canadian Northern Economic Development Agency

Mr. Speaker, as the hon. member has pointed out, this is a difficult situation caused by sole-source drug supply agreements with provinces and territories. I have strongly encouraged them to consider alternate arrangements that provide for multiple suppliers in the future.

Health Canada has provided provinces and territories the names of companies in Canada that are already licensed to produce the drugs that are in shortage. We have approved six drugs and are expediting the review of more. We are working around the clock to play our part in dealing with the important issue. We have also offered the provinces access to the national emergency stockpile system.

Mr. Speaker, there is not a fisheries group in Canada that supports the elimination of the owner-operator fleet separation policy. I introduced a motion to have the fisheries committee hear from the people who would suffer the most when these policies are removed.

Did the government vote this motion down because the inshore fishers have something that the corporate sector wants? Why is the government going to sacrifice communities in Quebec and Atlantic Canada just to satisfy corporate greed?

Mr. Speaker, it is scandalous that more Canada Post corporate outlets are being closed. We have learned that one of the few remaining corporate outlets, on Boulevard Sainte-Foy in Longueuil, will soon close.

This bad decision has consequences for the people in my riding. They will have to travel as far as Brossard, or even to Montreal, to obtain postal services, and this is very worrisome for our seniors. It also means that jobs are in jeopardy.

Will the minister assume his responsibilities and maintain public services? Will he stop further job losses?